Thanks for all your views everyone. Really appreciate it.

In terms of buyer behavior and preference, what would a buyer be thinking if they specifically wanted and RM image instead of a similar subject/image sold as RF? Since RM does not necessarily mean exclusiveness anyway.

Cheers,
PTLee

cclapper, according to Canon, the sensor on the 7D is an improvement over the 50D, in that the distance between the microlenses to the photodiode is reduced, so light focuses better on the photodiodes. So noise 'should' be better controlled. In any case, I would usually shoot at ISO 100 for MS, esp when I'm shooting (desktop) studio shots, landscapes I would usually use a tripod and opt for low ISO as well.

Noise is an issue for birding, esp where I come from, the birds are found in the dense rainforest, under challenging light conditions, we'd be lucky to be able to shoot at ISO 400, and to be able to shoot at ISO 1600 while keeping the feather details as shown in my Tiger Shrike shot is really great!

Thanks holgs. I've the 40D for birding, and always longed for better AF and more AF points for BIF shots, and Canon answered with the 7D, on top of that the 100% viewfinder is an added bonus. I'm surprised that Canon is able to pull off a usable (I wouldn't say miraculously noise free) 18megapixel 1.6x crop sensor, so I can crop and still easily retain over 10megapixel of useful data with details that the 40D has.

In terms of lower ISO noise (eg ISO 400), I've read some feedback that it's not good though, which is ironic somewhat, given that everyone has been looking at it's ISO 800/1600/3200 performance. I'm still testing out the camera under various conditions as they come (I don't do specific tests), and initial thoughts about the ISO400 noise isn't too bad, but not much to cheer about either. AF is great, some in flight shots were done with decent results, and the zonal/AF expansion is something I've started using and starting to get use to.

Overall, I think the 7D is much what I hoped for in a wildlife/birding camera, without the hefty price tag of a 1D mkIII (or mkIV if it is to be launched soon). Still have one gripe about AF ability with an f8 lens (eg a 1.4x TC on a, say, 400mm f5.6L lens), but that can be 'solved' with taped pins and good light.

That's my initial thoughts, I like the 7D for it's on-the-field usability (better AF, faster frame rate, 100% viewfinder), noise issue the verdict isn't quite out yet, but as long as I can keep it under control with NR filters, I would be happy. I don't expect a miracle in the noise department, 5D mkII is still the benchmark, and I doubt if any crop sensor can compete with the FF sensor of 5D.

For my MS shoots, it probably won't make much difference to me, for birds and wildlife, and probably sports, 7D would definitely be quite useful.

Cheers,
PTLee

Success in the stock image industry (by whatever measures) doesn't happen overnight. It takes hard work and dedication over a longer period of time.
Walk this road for 3 or 4 years with consistent new imagery and you'll see what I mean.

You also will always improve your quality and style - things you can't do without.

Most importantly: Use correct keywords. Buyers/researchers are (mostly) not idiots. If they have a concept in mind they also know how it could be visually conceived so they can come up with some keywords on their own. Stupid example is not to use the word "friend" in an image of a dog (although he might be man's best friend...). The buyer would know to look for a dog...

I'd suggest not to mix RF/RM of one subject like you did with the Hoover dam. I'd leave them all RM unless you have the RFs on the Micros.

That's just my opinion and some might suggest otherwise.

Points noted, and many thanks.

Cheers,
PTLee

I think it's probably their review process. The reviewers might have already have access to the images before it's completed.

A couple of times, I think they were just waiting for me to complete, as once I complete my submission, the approval/rejection comes in almost immediately 

Cheers,
PTLee

Thanks to everyone (Sharpshot, RT, Zues, Herman, Holg, melastmohican) for your kind advice and feedback. I really appreciate it. It has given me a better perspective of what Alamy is about.

RT, you raised a very good point about the RF & L images. I will be more careful at how I classify them in future. Don't think I can backtrack on the current RFs I have there, though they haven't sold any. By RM, would you be referring to Licensed, or the one with 'Rights Protected'?

Moving forward, I shall have a go at uploading a wider range of images, and the tough part of having to go through the keywords of my current images again.

I still have a number of images uploaded and as well as waiting on my harddisk, so I'll have lots to catch up on.

Anymore things I need to know?
Cheers,
PTLee

Thanks, so would that be 20 zooms of the same image, or just 20 zooms of images in a portfolio.

Ok... here's my link Images by PT Lee

Cheers,
PTLee

I took this in Singapore, needless to say it's been downloaded numerous times. I wish I could get it on DT though.

As Editorial?

Just noticed that it's now 16.43 million.

Cheers,
PTLee

I was thinking of giving Smugmug a go at selling prints of my photos. Maybe cafepress has a potential too. I guess the key is to be able to reach your target audience, marketing and making our site visible to potential buyers.

Haven't looked at zazzle though.

Cheers,
PTLee

Had a similar issue at 123RF recently, when some of my earnings went missing, resulting in a -'ve balance. Was about to write to them when a couple of days later it was back again. Wonder what was that all about.

To me, they are ok, with an easy submission process, I have no major complaints.

Cheers.

Like what some of the others mentioned, I prefer shooting macro under overcast skies, as it doesn't give harsh shadows. Bit the lack of shadows may also make the image a bit bland, with no sense of 'depth'.

So I would use an off-shoe cord to get the flash off centered, plus a flash diffuser to create some shadows, but not too harsh, use the flash as a fill-in, not the main source of light (ie, -'ve compensation). Plus the fill-in flash light could help bring out a more vibrant colour.

A reflector may also do a similar job, but I'm more used to using a fill-in flash approach.

Hope this helps

Cheers,
PTLee

Thanks for sharing, Antonio